6th March 2007
Endowment miss- selling and compensation calculation - should the methodology be reviewed?
According to an article this week in Mortgage Strategy, the number of Traded Endowment Policies purchased in 2006 more than doubled compared to the previous year, figures from the Association of Policy Market Makers reveal.
The article goes on to say that the APMM, states that the industry had experienced a record year driven by high demand for policies from overseas.
Brian Goldstein, chairman of APMM, says: "Last year, market makers saw record levels of demand for TEPs and it looks like 2007 will be an even more successful year.
“The market has been experiencing massive growth since 2004 and this latest set of figures, showing numbers of policies purchased have increased by around 120% year-on-year, is quite phenomenal.
"What this means for endowment policyholders is that market makers are now in a position to pay more money than ever before for TEPs, as demand for policies continues to climb.
“By selling a policy rather than surrendering it, policyholders could receive an average of 15% more money and market makers are reporting that quite often they are paying 30% more than surrender value."
As surrender values are being used to calculate redress, should the value for a redress calculation reflect the higher of the surrender value or what it could fetch in a TEP environment (if available as a higher option) thus reducing the burden on hard pressed IFAs and even the FSCS?
Brian Goldstein, chairman of APMM, says: "Last year, market makers saw record levels of demand for TEPs and it looks like 2007 will be an even more successful year.
“The market has been experiencing massive growth since 2004 and this latest set of figures, showing numbers of policies purchased have increased by around 120% year-on-year, is quite phenomenal.
"What this means for endowment policyholders is that market makers are now in a position to pay more money than ever before for TEPs, as demand for policies continues to climb.
“By selling a policy rather than surrendering it, policyholders could receive an average of 15% more money and market makers are reporting that quite often they are paying 30% more than surrender value."
As surrender values are being used to calculate redress, should the value for a redress calculation reflect the higher of the surrender value or what it could fetch in a TEP environment (if available as a higher option) thus reducing the burden on hard pressed IFAs and even the FSCS?
Your thoughts on this should be posted in our Mortgage forum.
You need to be logged in to comment on this article